Abstract

The primary purpose of the verification enhancement review was for the DOE Richland Operations Office (RL) to verify contractor readiness for the independent DOE Integrated Safety Management System Verification (ISMSV) on the Plutonium Finishing Plant (PFP). Secondary objectives included: (1) to reinforce the engagement of management and to gauge management commitment and accountability; (2) to evaluate the ''value added'' benefit of direct public involvement; (3) to evaluate the ''value added'' benefit of direct worker involvement; (4) to evaluate the ''value added'' benefit of the panel-to-panel review approach; and, (5) to evaluate the utility of the review's methodology/adaptability to periodic assessments of ISM status. The review was conducted on December 6-8, 1999, and involved the conduct of two-hour interviews with five separate panels of individuals with various management and operations responsibilities related to PFP. A semi-structured interview process was employed by a team of five ''reviewers'' who directed open-ended questions to the panels which focused on: (1) evidence of management commitment, accountability, and involvement; and, (2) consideration and demonstration of stakeholder (including worker) information and involvement opportunities. The purpose of a panel-to-panel dialogue approach was to better spotlight: (1) areas of mutual reinforcement and alignment that could serve as good examplesmore » of the management commitment and accountability aspects of ISMS implementation, and, (2) areas of potential discrepancy that could provide opportunities for improvement. In summary, the Review Team found major strengths to include: (1) the use of multi-disciplinary project work teams to plan and do work; (2) the availability and broad usage of multiple tools to help with planning and integrating work; (3) senior management presence and accessibility; (4) the institutionalization of worker involvement; (5) encouragement of self-reporting and self-assessment by management; (6) the availability of multiple internal communication mechanisms; and, (7) the existence of overall facility-wide safety management goals as well as individualized project work team goals. Major opportunities for improvement identified include: (1) the enhancement of external communications relative to ISM; (2) the institutionalization of ISM-related performance agreements/incentives; (3) the strengthening of feedback loops; (4) fine-tuning the use of tools; and, (5) the formalization of good practices.« less

@article{osti_801304,
title = {The Integrated Safety Management System Verification Enhancement Review of the Plutonium Finishing Plant (PFP)},
author = {BRIGGS, C.R.},
abstractNote = {The primary purpose of the verification enhancement review was for the DOE Richland Operations Office (RL) to verify contractor readiness for the independent DOE Integrated Safety Management System Verification (ISMSV) on the Plutonium Finishing Plant (PFP). Secondary objectives included: (1) to reinforce the engagement of management and to gauge management commitment and accountability; (2) to evaluate the ''value added'' benefit of direct public involvement; (3) to evaluate the ''value added'' benefit of direct worker involvement; (4) to evaluate the ''value added'' benefit of the panel-to-panel review approach; and, (5) to evaluate the utility of the review's methodology/adaptability to periodic assessments of ISM status. The review was conducted on December 6-8, 1999, and involved the conduct of two-hour interviews with five separate panels of individuals with various management and operations responsibilities related to PFP. A semi-structured interview process was employed by a team of five ''reviewers'' who directed open-ended questions to the panels which focused on: (1) evidence of management commitment, accountability, and involvement; and, (2) consideration and demonstration of stakeholder (including worker) information and involvement opportunities. The purpose of a panel-to-panel dialogue approach was to better spotlight: (1) areas of mutual reinforcement and alignment that could serve as good examples of the management commitment and accountability aspects of ISMS implementation, and, (2) areas of potential discrepancy that could provide opportunities for improvement. In summary, the Review Team found major strengths to include: (1) the use of multi-disciplinary project work teams to plan and do work; (2) the availability and broad usage of multiple tools to help with planning and integrating work; (3) senior management presence and accessibility; (4) the institutionalization of worker involvement; (5) encouragement of self-reporting and self-assessment by management; (6) the availability of multiple internal communication mechanisms; and, (7) the existence of overall facility-wide safety management goals as well as individualized project work team goals. Major opportunities for improvement identified include: (1) the enhancement of external communications relative to ISM; (2) the institutionalization of ISM-related performance agreements/incentives; (3) the strengthening of feedback loops; (4) fine-tuning the use of tools; and, (5) the formalization of good practices.},
doi = {10.2172/801304},
journal = {},
number = ,
volume = ,
place = {United States},
year = {Wed Feb 09 00:00:00 EST 2000},
month = {Wed Feb 09 00:00:00 EST 2000}
}

U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Policy 450.4, Safety Management System Policy commits to institutionalizing an Integrated Safety Management System (ISMS) throughout the DOE complex as a means of accomplishing its missions safely. DOE Acquisition Regulation 970.5204-2 requires that contractors manage and perform work in accordance with a documented safety management system.

The purpose of this document is to provide the definition and means of maintaining the safety envelope (SE) for the Emergency Notification and Evacuation System (ENES). Together with the appendices, it provides: (1) The system requirements for determining system operability (Section 3.0); (2) Evaluations of equipment to determine the safety boundary for the system (Section 4.0); (3) List of system drawings that are annotated to show the SE boundaries (Appendix A); (4) Identification of the SE equipment by reference to systems and drawings (Appendix B); (5) Requirements for the individual SE equipment (Section 4.0); and (6) A list of themore » operational and surveillance procedures necessary to operate and maintain the system equipment within the SE (Sections 5.0 and 6.0). The Private Automatic Exchange (PAX) phones and PAX switchers are outside the safety envelope defined in WHC-SD-CP-OSR-010, Section 5.4.10, ''Safety Communication and Alarm Systems,'' Section 5.4.1 0.1, ''Major Components and Operating Characteristics,'' and Section 5.4.10.1.12, ''PAX System.'' The PAX override microphone system maintains the safety envelope, and functions as a backup to the evacuation sirens during an emergency.« less

This document specifies the critical characteristics for Commercial Grade Items (CGI) procured for use in the Plutonium Finishing Plant as required by HNF-PRO-268 and HNF-PRO-1819. These are the minimum specifications that the equipment must meet in order to properly perform its safety function. There may be several manufacturers or models that meet the critical characteristics of any one item.

This document specifies the critical characteristics for Commercial Grade Items (CGI) procured for use in the Plutonium Finishing Plant as required HNF-PRO-268 and HNF-PRO-1819. These are the minimum specifications that the equipment must meet in order to properly perform its safety function. There may be several manufacturers or models that meet the critical characteristics of any one item.